Association Forum - Discussing brands and vendors

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

General Sailing Forum

Discussing brands and vendors

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Voyager
Master Marine Consultant

Member Avatar

USA
5231 Posts

Initially Posted - 09/01/2014 : 09:32:09

While we all have had good experiences and bad experiences with various vendors and many of us have preferences for and against certain vendors and models of sailing gear like PFDs, engines, vents, stoves, heaters, furlers, sails, lines, lamps and lighting, anchors, marine heads and tools, is there any kind of "fairness doctrine" related to individual's opinions on this Forum? That is, personal opinions, information, misinformation and beliefs are just that - personal: owned by the commenter, not the Forum or its Officers.
Harkening back to recent discussions about different products, there's really no requirement that commenters "prove" their statements as far as I can tell. A magazine like Practical Sailor can back up their results through their testing protocols. They don't go by anecdote, but use the scientific method (or their interpretation of it ;)
I like PoliGlow, am disappointed with NicroVent, love the Honda outboard and am repeatedly annoyed by West Marine. Others may have completely different opinions and anecdotes to support their opinions that may oppose and balance mine..

> Is there any reason NOT to hold frank discussions about likes and dislikes on products and vendors on this Forum?
> Does it potentially expose the Forum to legal action?

We all know that in our overly litigious world, anybody can sue anybody else about anything at all, so aside from nuisance suits, does this kind of speech pose any significant risk for our Forum?

Edited by - on

Stinkpotter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
9013 Posts

Response Posted - 09/01/2014 : 10:18:29

I guess our Legal Eagles should weigh in... Steve??

I do recall some sort of threat from some (unnamed) sailmaker a few years back, in response to some comments here, resulting in the deletion of an entire thread. (Maybe I shouldn't even have brought that up!

)

Edited by - Stinkpotter on 09/01/2014 10:19:33

islander
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3992 Posts

Response Posted - 09/01/2014 : 12:44:30

Bottom of the forum page..
Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5851 Posts

Response Posted - 09/01/2014 : 15:21:42

IMO, if people use good judgment, there isn't much risk in commenting unfavorably about a product, but, if you get angry and start spouting every damaging thing you can think of, with an intention of harming the business, you can certainly open yourself to lawsuit.

Bear in mind that the general rule is that truth is a complete defense in a defamation action. Limit your comments to the literal truth. Exaggeration is your enemy, and speaking out in anger is dangerous. You are entitled to your opinion, but you aren't entitled to make factually false and defamatory representations.

Also bear in mind that our officers are volunteers. We don't compensate them for running our association. If a member makes false and defamatory remarks, the member won't be the only person who is likely to be sued. Our officers might also be included. The Association's finances wouldn't last long if they had to be used to defend our officers from a lawsuit. If they are threatened with a lawsuit because of the remarks of a member, it is, IMO, perfectly reasonable for the officers to delete the remarks. Ordinarily I would expect that to be the end of it as far as the officers are concerned, and then you'll be on your own, to defend the lawsuit all by yourself, and at your own expense. With self restraint and good judgment on the part of the members, the risk is quite small. Fair comment about a product doesn't represent much risk.

Edited by - Steve Milby on 09/01/2014 15:36:20

Voyager
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
5231 Posts

Response Posted - 09/01/2014 : 18:54:33

A sad reality about people's perception of the Internet is that people believe they can misbehave in writing with an expectation that it's just e-reality so you're safe. People will do or say things that they'd never say in "real-life". The basic fallacy is that could not be farther from the truth. In fact, anything you say on the Internet or email or FB, etc, is akin to writing it on a billboard sign. Libel and slander are the same whether verbal, in print or on the 'net. The days of unbridled "flaming" are gone forever.

Edited by - on

dasreboot
Admiral

Members Avatar

803 Posts

Response Posted - 09/02/2014 : 06:28:03

they can sue. they won't win. they might win against the user who made the comments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

Edited by - on

TakeFive
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

2269 Posts

Response Posted - 09/02/2014 : 06:41:29

quote:
Originally posted by dasreboot

they can sue. they won't win....

Everyone will lose. The costs of defending against even a frivolous suit could put a small organization like C25IA completely under. That's why the organization and its website need policies that minimize the likelihood of any suit being filed.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5851 Posts

Response Posted - 09/02/2014 : 06:51:12

quote:
Originally posted by dasreboot

they can sue. they won't win. they might win against the user who made the comments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

That's good to know. It appears to protect the Association and officers from an adverse judgment, but, as you point out, a plaintiff can sue, but they can't win. That means the association and/or officers might nevertheless have to defend themselves until a judge dismisses them out of the case. If the members only express their opinions and make fair comments, nobody should have to worry.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5851 Posts

Response Posted - 09/02/2014 : 07:14:10

quote:
Originally posted by TakeFive

quote:
Originally posted by dasreboot

they can sue. they won't win....

Everyone will lose. The costs of defending against even a frivolous suit could put a small organization like C25IA completely under. That's why the organization and its website need policies that minimize the likelihood of any suit being filed.

Sometimes having formal "policies" can be limiting. In the absence of any specific policy on the matter, the Commodore and officers have the broadest possible discretion to deal with a problem as they see fit. A poorly conceived "policy" could limit their discretion. They can delete any post that they feel might have stepped over the line, or, they can delete it even if they think it constitutes fair comment. If they delete a post, they will greatly reduce the likelihood that they will be joined as a defendant in an action. Moreover, if a plaintiff joins the association or its officers, knowing that they are shielded by the Communications Decency Act, the plaintiff might even subject himself to sanctions by the court, including being required to pay the Association's and officers' attorney fees. If I were representing the Association, the first thing I would do would be to write a letter to the plaintiff's counsel, warning him that sanctions would be sought from his client if the Association and it's officers were not immediately dismissed from the suit. If I were representing the plaintiff and received such a letter, I would dismiss the Association and it's officers from the action.

Edited by - Steve Milby on 09/02/2014 07:42:51

JohnP
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

1519 Posts

Response Posted - 09/02/2014 : 10:18:39

For everybody using our wonderfully informative Forum, if you feel you must give strongly negative comments about anyone or anything, just remember to preface the comments with the words "In my opinion..." or "I think that ...".

Legally, those statements are then distinct from statements of the negative opinions as supposed facts. A definitive, negative comment without those provisos can tend towards libel or slander of the person or the product.

Be smart, and be safe.

Edited by - on

Voyager
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
5231 Posts

Response Posted - 09/03/2014 : 07:46:25

I appreciate the comments since its good to know in general how to minimize exposure all around. Thanks
Lets get back to facts rather than opinion for a moment. Suppose a forum member or guest were mistreated by a vendor: over-representation of product features, poor product quality, followed up by the vendor not providing a substitute or a refund, or providing dismissive or abusive customer service. And suppose the posting thread chronicled the story over time... Factually. Now the product's performance would fall far below its claims, then the remedy would be nonexistent or unsatisfactory and customer service was arrogant or flip. These are facts. Is this the kind of speech that could still invite legal action?

Edited by - on

JohnP
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

1519 Posts

Response Posted - 09/03/2014 : 08:09:19

If the statement were made online that "the product's performance would fall far below its claims", instead of "I think the product's performance would fall far below its claims", it would be risky.

If it's not your official duty to report on these things, it's always safer not to condemn anything online! If you are working for Consumer Reports or for Practical Sailor, then your responsibility is to report on problems.

If you have been cheated, then sending a lawyer's letter often gets results. Advertising your negative emotions with inflammatory speech does not help.

But, of course, that's just my opinion.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5851 Posts

Response Posted - 09/03/2014 : 08:59:50

The harsh reality is that, if someone chooses to abuse court processes, you can be sued, no matter how "right" you are. Remember the case in Washington DC, where the plaintiff sued a cleaning establishment, initially demanding $67 million for inconvenience, mental anguish and attorney's fees for representing himself, as a result of their failure, in the plaintiff's opinion, to live up to a "satisfaction guaranteed" sign that was displayed in the store? The case drew international attention when it went to trial in 2007 and has been held up as an example of frivolous litigation and the need for tort reform in the United States. You can't prevent them from filing a frivolous action. You can only ask the court to declare it frivolous, and to impose sanctions on the plaintiff.

People complain online all the time about poor customer service and poor product performance, without getting sued. There's no reason to fear doing so. But, You can state your complaint in a matter-of-fact manner, or you can sit down and ponder over how you can state it in the most stinging, damaging manner possible. The latter approach invites a response.

In making your complaint, stick with provable facts, avoid name-calling and epithets, exercise self-restraint and sound judgment, and don't invite an attack.

Edited by - Steve Milby on 09/03/2014 09:02:00

pastmember
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

2402 Posts

Response Posted - 09/03/2014 : 09:19:11

Steve, I thought first year law Torts 101 said Truth is a defense in defamation.

Edited by - on

Steve Milby
Past Commodore

Members Avatar

USA
5851 Posts

Response Posted - 09/03/2014 : 09:34:38

quote:
Originally posted by pastmember

Steve, I thought first year law Torts 101 said Truth is a defense in defamation.

Truth is a defense, but the facts that support the defense must be proven at a trial.

Edited by - on

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.